How clean/elegant is Python's syntax?

[Rustom Mody]

On Friday, May 31, 2013 at 1:06:29 AM UTC+5:30, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Thu, 30 May 2013 10:12:22 -0700, rusi wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 9:34 AM, Ma Xiaojun wrote:
> 
> >> Wait a minute! Isn't the most nature way of doing/thinking "generating
> >> 9x9 multiplication table" two nested loop?
> > 
> > Thats like saying that the most natur(al) way of using a car is to
> > attach a horse to it.
> >[...]
> > Likewise in the world of programming, 90% of programmers think
> > imperative/OO programming is natural while functional programming is
> > strange.  Just wait 10 years and see if things are not drastically
> > different!
> 
> It won't be. Functional programming goes back to Lisp, which is nearly as 
> old as Fortran and older than Cobol. There have been many decades for 
> functional languages to become mainstream, but they've never quite done 
> it. There's no reason to think that the next decade will see a change to 
> this.

Interesting point...
With interesting (counter)examples: http://blog.languager.org/2016/01/how-long.html

[With apologies for necroposting]